tv [untitled] October 9, 2012 9:30pm-10:00pm PDT
hall and this is the kind of inequity i'm talking about. we need accountability. so i appreciate that and we need that. thank you. >> thank you, mr. everett. >> i'm the type the progressive who grieves believes that we're only as wealthy as the least among us. so means that in san francisco we can only go as far as the african-american young men and women who have been economically disadvantaged for generations here in the city. we need to provide jobs. with when we talk about green jobs of future and sustainable produce, we need to talk about how to feed the single mothers in those communities. we need comprehensive reforms to bring those disadvantaged communitis with us. we cannot provide those folks
with jobs unless we reform our drug policies in san francisco, which essentially disadvantage and persecute young men of color who on a day to day basis are being subjected to the criminal justice system in a way that is not done by other members of our society. >> you have got another minute. [ laughter ] >> on a day to day basis what we're doing here in san francisco is we are disenfranchising folks and limiting their ability for future employment. once you have a conviction for a non-violent drug-related crime, your chances of getting a future employment are essentially nil. there was a research study published recently in a san francisco newspaper, that showed the rate of drug convictions dropped, and the violent crime here in san francisco did not rise.
essentially what we're saying is that there is no correlation between drug use and violent crime. so the whole notion that we have to go after these folks to go into their neighborhoods and essentially make had a police state of their neighborhoods is ridiculous, preposterous and anne ethical and moral failure in the city and we need someone bold enough, proud enough to reverse this trend and ex-power the folks because that way we're more united and a stronger city heading into the future. >> can i say one thing? we heard from a police captain that we know that is not true. that has been proven in the literature and i can't believe we're hearing this when we have limited police resources. thank you. >> mr. davis >> let's be frank there are control interests in agenda at
city hall and a cronyisticism that includes [hr-ufrpl/]ry condominium for the ultra rich, corporate tax breaks, chain stores and parking garages, a vision for san francisco that doesn't include a lot of everyday people. it's getting to where students and seniors on fixed incomes and young families and teachers and firefighters and everyday folks can no longer afford to live in san francisco. we have a crisis of affordability here. i think the city's economic development polices have a lot to do with why we're starting job/housing imbalance when you are so focused on the power elite, the twitter tax breaks and not focused, which i think we need to start to do. on the economic development interests of our small businesses.
which are the life blood of the san francisco economy 80% of our economy is small business along our commercial corridors and most jobs are created by small businesses each year. the city needs to reorient its economic polices towards small businesses and start to remove the red tape and stream-lining the permitting process and other ways to facilitate small businesses to thrive and survive in san francisco. so my no. 1 priority is reorienting our economic polices away from the cronyism, the power elect elite and back to the small businesses. >> i was born and raised in the district. that is not why i think you should vote for me as your supervisor. my entire life was been
committed to this district starting when i worked for the mayor where women were trained i know what good social services look like, but i understand that we can't exclude people because they are rich. we can't exclude people because they are middle-class at the expense of making sure we're taking care of one class of people. i worked really hard and there were a lot of people that helped me become the person who i am. sadly, my brother did not make it through. he is in jail now. my sister died from an overdose, and all of this to fight the good fight to make sure that access to opportunity doesn't stop with me. everybody on this panel, we have got some great people and they have made a lot of need to be taken into
consideration. but i think that mine experience of not only being on the redevelopment agency commission and working on the fire commission and working in the community day in and day out with the people that many of these folks are mentioning is what is going to create the success we need this district. the kids need an opportunity . that is what stops crime. they don't need a handout. they need to learn how to take care of themselves. that is what happened to me and why i am here because of an opportunity, not a handout. i have not seen many of these candidates until now actively engaged in the community. it baffles me and what i would like to see it proof that they have the ability to do this job. my experience, my track record demonstrates that i have the ability to do this job. i am prepared to do this job.
thank you very much. and i'm ready and willing and so i ask that you seriously consider me. and i will make sure that i get on us on the right path, but more specifically dealing with making sure that we have access to real job opportunities, not just for the rich, not just for the poor, but for everybody in between as well. thank you. >> miss olague would like to use her time card. >> i just wanted to mention that a lot of these ideas that people have referred to this evening, i'm already working on. we have worked extensively with small businesses. we are attempting to establish neighborhood named districts along the divasdero and lower filmore area. i have spend extensive amounts of time in japantown and the lower haight and upper haight and other neighbors of this
district. and today we had actually three hearings. one that we were approached by members of the community, some community-based organizations. people wanted us to look at the african-american achievement gaps in high schools, which we also ended up talking about the latino achievement gaps and it was really alarming. very disappointing the statistics that we heard today. as miss johnson mentioned we're asking that the housing authority hearings finally be made public, because we need more transparency this and we're asking for a right to return to public housing. we wrote legislation about that, so we have been spending tons of time in the community. >> miss selby. >> i just wanted to say what i want for this district, i don't have the advantage of actually being in office now, but what i want for this district is a safe and thriving district and i want a strong voice for neighborhoods at city hall. i'm the only mother who is
running and when i win, i will be the only mother at the board of supervisors. i am the small business person, had my own small business for the last ten years. believe me, i know what this city does and doesn't do for small business and it can definitely do more. finally i believe i'm the only president of a neighborhood and merchant organization up here and i have worked hard to turn around the lower haight from one where people said they wouldn't walk on my side of the street to one that is safe, thriving and inclusive and i want to do this for this entire district. i want a safe and thriving district and a voice at city hall for all. >> we have come to the time where members have been so generous with sharing their time cards, i don't know, does anybody else have a minute's worth of a final appeal to get off their chest? miss johnson?
>> yes, i have two years' worth of history of voting on really difficult issues. these are people who were members of public, who found they needed help and found there was limited access to people in city hall. and you can look this up online. i'm not just pretending that i'm going to do this or just saying that i'm going to do. a lot of politicians will not endorse me because i have held them accountable. you need to pay attention to what people say they will do and what they do. we had muni drivers who were fired because they didn't support prop g and couldn't have access to their personnel files and we had to help them do that. these are the kind of things that we're up against. the voters need to pay attention to the history of how people vote. it's not that we don't have a record, but i believe in
participation by the public. and i have a voting record on that. >> thank you. and i guess there are a couple other candidates who decided that they have a closing statement to offer as well. mr. everett? >> as an attorney, i am required to uphold the laws of the state of california, and the united states as well. i'm required to do so in a completely even-handed manner. i do so with no problem and with all the love in my heart. that being said, it would be ridiculous, disingenuous and completely unhelpful not to realize that certain segments within our population here in san francisco need help more than others. it would be absolutely preposterous for me to sit up here and tell you that we're going to approach polices of economic advantagement in an even-handed manner. that would do a disservice to and again, we are a weaker city if we allow certain segments of
you are population to essentially rot. we're a stronger, vibrant and more resilient city if we address the issues of those least among us, tackle them, and face them head-on. >> thank you. >> that is what i'm about. truth and honesty in our policy approached. >> mr. resignato. >> i think one important thing we need to look at is vision. really, you know? a vision for what san francisco is going to be. and i think that involves looking at a lot of different things. one thing that daniel mentioned and we have mentioned about public safety is that we're not using our police resources wisely or not using science to guide where to use our police resources. we need to look at our transportation system and revolutionize that. that will improve a lot of things, public health, public safety, commerce. so we need
to be looking with a vision for the future about what we want our city to be. and i think i have done that before and like i said, i'm for prevention. and i'm for looking to the future and figuring out how we can sculpt a better san francisco and that is what i will do as supervisor. thank you, mr. davis. i want to remind folks and point out that we have seen a disturbing trend in san francisco over the past couple ever years. of years. we have had a lot of leadership appointed for us. an appointed mayor, appointed district attorney when our leaders are chosen for us instead of by us. if you want leadership in our
city, i'll i'm your candidate. at juliandavis.org, there is more detail about the grassroots campaign we're building. i encourage you to look where the candidates are getting their money from. i think it says a lot about whose interests they will be representing. thank you. >> anybody else? miss olague? >> again, i just wanted to welcome all of you to the office, room 256 of city hall and we are engaging with neighbors all the time. recently i voted in favor of community choice aggregation. i am a sponsor of the affordable housing proposition c. we worked extensively with community counsel for housing organizations to make sure that we had the right balance. i worked on the gross receipts measure that is on the ballot
currently. so there are a lot of things that we're working on. we're working with small businesses extensively and so i welcome you to come in and share your ideas and let's work together to create a better city. i am christiana olague, supervisor district 5 and i appreciate your support in keeping me in office in november. we can work together with all sides of the political spectrum to create the best city we can create, one that is balanced and fair. >> thank you. miss breed? >> why not, right? >> you are a candidate, yes. [ laughter ] >> i am so proud of the work that i have been able to do in the district. i currently have kids that -- and when i say kids, teenagers, 18, 19, 20. i'm not a mom myself, so i look at the kids in the district as my mine. so in order to get them to attend john adams and school, i'm active not just in
running for office, but the work doesn't stop because of the campaign. we should elect a supervisor who understands the challenges of the district, who understands how to bring people together. and who has, as andrew said, a vision for the future of what the district should look like? i understand and remember the past. it was not always bright in the district. q+!rknow how to make good th happen and bring people together in our community. and also, i know what a great district 5 could potentially look like. the african-american art and culture complex was once a place falling apart. it's now a place thriving with artists and the community and with you if you come visit us. it's an amazing facility and it's exactly what i want to make district 5, an amazing district 5. london breed for district 5 supervisor. >> thank you very much. thank you to all of you, [ applause ] >> before you leave tonight,
let me remind you, if you are not registered to vote, please register right away and encourage others as well. if you have moved, you need to register again with your new address. on believe of myself, the [wo-uflt/] league of women voters, and sfgtv and our sponsors thank you and good evening. [ applause ]
. >> hi, i'm richard janning, a board member of the league of women voters. along with the league and sf gof tv, i'm here to discuss proposition d, a ballot measure that will be before the voters on november 6. the mayor, sheriff and district attorney are elected in november of the same year. the city attorney and treasurer are elected in november of a different year. proposition d is a charter amendment that would change the election cycle for city attorney and treasurer so that these officers would be elected at the same time as the mayor, sheriff and district attorney beginning in 2015. i'm here with district 8 supervisor scott weiner, and
dr. scott fauker, an opponent of proposition d >> let's start with you, supervisor. thanks for having me. proposition d is a good government measure that will increase voter turnout in our elections for city attorney and treasurer, two very important offices, and will also save the city 4.2 million dollars every 4 years. right now we elect our city attorney and treasurer in a very, very low turnout odd year election where they are the only two offices on the ballot. and turnout is always extremely low in that election. and it costs us over $4 million dollars to hold that election. proposition d would move the city attorney and treasurer elections to be on the same ballot as the mayor, which is a much myer turn jut election, so more people would be voting for
city attorney and treasurer and every time we don't hold that very low turnout odd year election separately for city attorney and treasurer, we'll save 4.2 million dollars. prop d was put on the ballot unanimously by the board of supervisors and it's been endorsed overwhelmingly by both the democratic and republican party. >> dr. faulkner, do you think this is a good idea. >> it has several problems. the original theory is the charter of 1932 was to stagger elections so people would pay more attention to each office, in other words, elect a couple offices each time and do it on an annual basis. this has been modified with various charter amendments but the new charter but the other way theoretically you have more people involved, but in practice when you have those 3-page ballots printed on either side, offices get lost. things like city attorney and city treasurer will get lost in
the shuffle. the big problem is city government, making sure the people actually pay attention. we have had a problem for a long time with san francisco and dysfunctional san francisco. that's depending on other city issues that are up, the coalition to san francisco neighborhoods is going against them. we have a city government that's very out of touch in many ways and we're, frankly, annual elections would be very wise to keep the people paying attention it what's happened. we have very strong developer interest, strong lobbyist influence, and very little public interest. things get sidelined and they wonder why things suddenly get opposed like the park bond which is being heavily opposeopposed. >> thank you. supervisor, do you believe
having the elections all at one time is better for the electorate or does it get lost when you have so many positions up for election? >> since he did raise the issue of the parks bond, we're not here for that. the parks bond has very overwhelming support. going back to prop d, there's a balance to be struck. i agree if we only had, if we elected everything from president to dog catcher all on 1 ticket at some point it gets to be too much, but if you spread everything out too much, we could have separate elections for like two offices here, two offices there and have multiple elections every year. yes, that would give more air time to each individual election but no one would vote and you'd have extremely low turn out elections. so for the city attorney-treasurer elections at issue here, even though they have higher prominence in their stand alone odd year election, when only 15, 20 percent, maybe 25 percent in a good year, are
actually voting in that election, what's the point? more prominence but no one's actually voting for it. a bad turnout for a mayoral election is better than a good turnout for city attorney-treasurer stand alone election. so combining those elections gives a bad balance in terms of increasing voter participation and improving our budget situation. >> thank you. dr. faulkner, if we don't have good voter turnout for the odd year for the city treasurer position, why not combine it with the rest? >> as i said, annual elections at least keep people paying attention. the history of san francisco, which is not a good one, we have had a lot of corruption over the years, russ baldwin, the roof ring, the history of san francisco is pretty open. we have had a tremendous amount of developer
influence at city hall, a tremendous amount of lobbying, the people are pushed out of it. we need more public participation. originally odd elections were scheduled for the mayor's race, we do not schedule it with the president for that reason. with the first repeal of district elections the people who did the first repeal suddenly moved it over to presidential and gubenatorial elections and changed the pattern. >> dr. faulkner, excuse me for a second. i'm trying to get back to the point here. if we don't feel there's sufficient voter turnout in the treasurer cycle, why not put it with the all the rest. >> first of all we usually have other measures up at the same time including ballot
measures, bonds and all the rest. usually those annual elections are important. often they are combined with stake wide elections anyway. the 4 million he is talking about is an illusion because we frequently have special elections for the state as well. that's a very persistent thing under schwarzenegger and a lot of people. >> supervisor, we have a little time left and i would like you to conclude and give your opinion why you think we should be voting for this. >> in 2001 we elected city attorney and treasurer in an election that had i think something like 12 or 13 percent turnout. these are two very, very important positions, we should maximize turnout. i think it makes perfect sense to elect these positions with the mayor. i can't tell you how many people after i proposed this at the board of supervisors, paepl on the board, off the board, came up to me and said why didn't anyone think of this before, it makes so much sense. it will save us money, it will
mean more people voting for city attorney and treasurer and if that's not democracy, i don't know what is. there's a reason why this is getting such broad support and i think it deserves the voters' support. >> thank you. and dr. faulkner, would you please summarize why you believe people should be voting against this measure? >> originally it was all odd year elections for city government. the main focus was to have a lot of elections spread out so people would pay attention. that was the idea of the 1932 charter. it is good in the sense given the history of san francisco and, frankly, a lot of governmental problems we had historically, getting people to pay attention to city government has been very important. we had 1901 to 1907 a group called roof ring, they described the 18 supervisors then on the board as, quote, so corrupt they would eat the paint off the walls. that's the reason why we want people
to pay attention to their city government. frankly, new england city governments are the small ones and tall hall government is the best of all. we can't do that. but we can give people is exposure to city government, it avoids a lot of problems. we have had a lot of mistakes. (inaudible) was not built when they put in the underground, that caused umpty million dollars to correct. >> we hope this discussion was informative. for more information on this and other ballot measures in this year's election, please visit the san francisco league of women voters at sfvotes.org. remember, early voting is available at city hall monday through friday from 8:00 am to